Skip to main content
Download PDF

Diet quality in medical trainees: a cross-sectional assessment comparing medical students and primary care residents using the Rapid Eating Assessment for Participants—shortened version

BMC Nutrition volume 10, Article number: 106 (2024) Cite this article

Abstract

Background

The diet quality of the US population is significantly unhealthy, with critical long-term implications for the nation’s health. A few studies have explored diet quality in the future primary care workforce. This cross-sectional study quantifies the diet quality of medical students and primary care residents at a Midwestern college of medicine in the United States.

Methods

250 medical students and 148 primary care residents were surveyed electronically utilizing the Rapid Eating Assessment for Participants—Shortened Version (REAP-S). The survey consists of 13 questions that can be scored on a scale from 1 to 3, along with 3 questions that are not scored. The average REAP-S score for a US omnivorous diet is 32 (range 13 to 39) with higher scores indicating a higher quality diet. We obtained average REAP-S scores for all respondents and descriptive summary statistics for individual REAP-S items. Students’ REAP-S total scores were compared to those of residents and the interaction between student/resident status and BMI category on REAP-S total scores were analyzed using analyses of variance. Differences between students and residents on BMI categories and other outcomes (individual REAP-S items, pandemic dietary and weight changes) were analyzed using Chi-Square Tests of Independence or Fisher’s Exact Tests.

Results

Medical students (n = 99; 39.6% response rate) had a significantly higher mean REAP-S score (30.5, SD = 3.9) than primary care residents (n = 72; 49% response rate) (mean = 28.6, SD = 3.9; p = 0.006). Total mean REAP-S scores were significantly higher for those with BMI < 25 (mean = 30.8, SD = 3.7) than for those with BMI > = 25 (mean = 28.3, SD = 4.0; p < 0.001). There was not a statistically significant interaction between role (student vs. resident) and BMI category on total REAP-S scores (p = 0.39). Most respondents (89.3%) indicated that they were willing to improve their diet.

Conclusion

Our data suggest that the diet quality of surveyed medical students and primary care residents, as quantified by the REAP-S, is suboptimal. Early detection and improvement of diet quality may be necessary for our medical profession trainees to avert potential long-term adverse cardiometabolic health outcomes, and to optimize the health of our future primary care workforce.

Peer Review reports

Introduction

The critical role diet quality plays in many non-communicable diseases, including cancer and mental health, is becoming evident [1, 2]. Poor diet quality, along with lack of physical activity, has emerged as a crucial driver of cardiovascular health outcomes. Various reports emphasize the national and global urgency to better understand diet quality, as well as to analyze the factors that contribute to poor diet quality and identify ways to improve diet [3]. A healthy diet, particularly in early adult life, can extend the “health span” of the general population. Additionally, members of our future healthcare workforce, who will be at the forefront of managing increasing chronic disease burdens due to lifestyle factors, need to understand and manage their own diet quality [4].

Diet quality is broadly defined as a dietary pattern or an indicator of variety across the main food groups as recommended in national nutrition guidelines. It consists of an overall assessment of the foods consumed rather than any single nutrient or food [5, 6]. The terms “diet quality” and “dietary quality” have been used interchangeably in publications referring to the overall quality of a diet. In this study, the authors will use the term “diet quality.”

The concept of diet quality is relatively new and evolving; overall diet quality has been noted to be more correlated with health than any individual macronutrient or isolated food items. However, a clear understanding of dietary metrics is essential for expanding research around this topic [5,6,7,8]. Poor diet quality has emerged as one of the most important risk factors for mortality and is associated with 11 million deaths and approximately 50% of cardiovascular deaths globally [9].

In order to quantify diet quality, Diet Quality Indices (DQIs) have been developed. These assessment tools utilize matrices that score food and/or nutrient intakes by frequency or estimation of consumption and according to how closely they align with dietary guidelines. [7]. Some indices include additional lifestyle factors or other items that may not be scored [5]. The Healthy Eating Index (HEI) is a premier dietary quality index that is regularly updated and aligns with the latest United States (US) dietary guidelines. However, it is rather lengthy, with a 15-minute completion time, and is used primarily in research settings [10]. The Rapid Eating Assessment for Participants (REAP) was developed as a diet quality screening tool to aid nutritional counseling in clinical practice where time is often constrained [11]. A shortened version of this dietary index was subsequently developed (REAP-S) and validated in a group of medical trainees [12] and has been found to correlate with cardiometabolic outcomes [13, 14].

A wide variety of complex factors contribute to the quality of foods consumed by an individual, including socio-economic and psychological factors [15]. Little is known about diet quality in US medical students or primary care residents. There is some research that examined nutrient intake or diet quality of medical students in the context of culinary nutrition courses or other nutrition-focused education [16,17,18,19]. Other studies examined specific dietary components rather than overall diet quality [20,21,22]. The aim of the current study is to examine and compare overall diet quality, as measured by the REAP-S, of primary care residents and medical students, independent of targeted nutritional educational endeavors. Additionally, we examine how diet quality differs based on body mass index (BMI). Our hypotheses were:

  1. 1.

    Overall diet quality for primary care residents would be lower than that of medical students.

  2. 2.

    Those with a body mass index (BMI) > = 25 would have poorer diet quality.

  3. 3.

    The relationship between BMI and diet quality would not differ depending on whether the respondent was a resident or a student.

Methods

Study design

This cross-sectional, single-center survey study was conducted at an academic medical center in the midwestern US.

Participants and recruitment

The study population consisted of two groups. The first group consisted of all medical students officially enrolled in June 2020 (n = 250). This group included students who were just finishing their 1st or 2nd years of medical school. Fourth-year students had already graduated, and incoming 1st year students had not yet matriculated. The second group consisted of all residents who were training in family medicine and internal medicine in May-June, 2021 (n = 148). All potential participants received an email invitation to participate in the study. Clearance to conduct the survey was granted from the Institutional Review Board (IRB #492-20-EX and IRB #0217-21-EX) of the affiliated university medical center and from the dean of the medical school. Informed consent was given at the time of the survey.

Instruments

The researchers compiled a survey to address the research objectives. Questions included some demographic information along with questions about respondents’ height and weight.

Diet quality was assessed using the Rapid Eating Assessment for Participants—Shortened Version (REAP-S). The REAP-S consists of 16 questions about food consumption. The first 13 questions ask participants to recall their eating behavior, dietary patterns, and types and quantities of food eaten during the prior week. Questions 14–16 collect information on current cooking and eating habits (eating at home versus eating out) and willingness to improve eating patterns. Diet quality was quantified by scoring questions 1–13 on a 3-point scale: Usually/Often (1 point), Sometimes (2 points), and Rarely/Never or Does Not Apply to Me (3 points). Questions 14–16 were not included in the total score. Total possible scores range from 13 to 39, with higher scores indicative of better diet quality. Based on the average omnivorous US diet, the developers of the REAP-S determined that a score > = 32 can be considered a “healthier” diet [14].

The REAP-S has been validated with dietary intakes in medical students. It correlates with the much longer Healthy Eating Index and other well-documented markers of diet quality and cardiometabolic health [11, 12, 14, 23]. The REAP-S does not need trained staff to administer or interpret results and has negligible costs associated with its use.

Survey procedure

All enrolled medical students and primary care residents were emailed an invitation to participate in the study with instructions for accessing the web-based survey. Surveys remained open for two weeks. A reminder email was sent at the end of the first week. Participants were asked to reference an average week when answering the survey questions. Responses were captured anonymously in a secure database.

Data analysis

Responses to height and weight questions were used to calculate body mass index (BMI) using the following formula:

$$BMI=703* \frac{weight in pounds}{{\left(height in inches\right)}^{2}}$$

We dichotomized BMI into two groups, those with BMI < 25 kg/m2 (normal weight and below) and those with BMI > = 25 kg/m2 (overweight and obese).

We obtained average REAP-S scores for all respondents and descriptive summary statistics for individual REAP-S items. Students’ REAP-S total scores were compared to those of residents and the interaction between student/resident status and BMI category on REAP-S total scores were analyzed using analyses of variance. Differences between students and residents on BMI categories and other outcomes (individual REAP-S items, pandemic dietary and weight changes) were analyzed using Chi-Square Tests of Independence (when minimum expected frequencies were met) or Fisher’s Exact Tests (when expected frequencies were too small for Chi-Square tests). All analyses were conducted using SPSS v28.0. An alpha level of 0.05 was used to assess statistical significance.

Results

Complete responses on all REAP-S items were received from 171 participants (43% response rate); 99 were medical students (out of 250; 39.6% response rate) and 72 were residents (out of 148; 48.6% response rate). Of the residents who responded to the survey, 47% were women and the average age was 29.19 years. Information on race/ethnicity was not collected. Gender, age and race/ethnicity were not collected from student respondents. However, in Spring 2020, 79.7% of the students enrolled in the College of Medicine were White non-Hispanic, 45.3% were women and 88.1% were between the ages of 22-29 [24]. Those who did not have complete REAP-S responses (3 students and 4 residents) were excluded from all analyses. The average REAP-S score for all respondents was 29.7 (SD = 4.0).

A total of 54.7% of respondents reported a BMI < 25, while 45.3% reported a BMI > = 25. Students (59.2%) tended to be more likely than residents (48.6%) to report a BMI < 25, although results of a Chi Square Test of Independence revealed that this difference was not statistically significant (p = 0.17).

A factorial analysis of variance was used to examine the effects of role (student vs. resident), BMI category (< 25 vs. >=25), and their interaction on total REAP-S scores. The total mean REAP-S scores for students was significantly higher (mean = 30.5, SD = 3.9) than that for residents (mean = 28.6, SD = 3.9; p = 0.006; Tables 1 and 2). Additionally, the total mean REAP-S scores were significantly higher for those with BMI < 25 (mean = 30.8, SD = 3.7) than for those with BMI > = 25 (mean = 28.3, SD = 4.0; p < 0.001). However, there was not a statistically significant interaction between role and BMI category on total REAP-S scores (p = 0.39). Thus, the total REAP-S scores between normal/low (< 25) and overweight/obese ( > = 25) BMI groups does not differ based on whether the participant was a student or a resident. The power for the test of the interaction was 0.14; the study may have been underpowered to detect a significant interaction.

Table 1 Mean REAP-S scores by role, BMI category
Full size table
Table 2 P-values, effect sizes and power – REAP-S scores by role, BMI category
Full size table

Results of Chi-Square Tests of Independence or Fisher’s Exact Tests revealed that students and residents did not differ significantly (all p-values > 0.05) on all except one of the 13 individual items that comprise the total REAP-S scores. However, students trended toward healthier eating options (more frequently reporting “Rarely/Never” exhibiting poor diet quality behaviors; Fig. 1). A significant difference was found in the frequency with which participants skipped breakfast; 50.5% of students reported “Rarely/Never” skipping breakfast, significantly more than the 31.9% of residents who reported the same (p = 0.04).

Fig. 1
figure 1

REAP-S question scores

Full size image

Analyses of the additional unscored REAP-S questions assessing cooking and eating habits and willingness to change indicate that students reported a greater likelihood to prepare meals at home rather than eating restaurant meals (92.9%) when compared to residents (87.5%). However, this difference is not statistically significant (Table 3). Students reported a significantly higher likelihood of feeling well enough to shop or cook (96.0%) than residents (86.1%; p = 0.02). A combined 153 students and residents (89.3%) indicated that they would be “Somewhat” or “Very” willing to change their eating habits in order to be healthier.

Table 3 Unscored REAP-S item responses for students and residents
Full size table

Discussion

This study reports on the diet quality among a group of US medical students and primary care residents. On a scale of 13–39, where higher scores indicate better diet quality, 32 is the mean REAP-S score for adults eating a typical omnivorous diet; this has been recommended as a cutoff for comparison [2, 14]. Our overall sample had a mean REAP-S score of 29.7, confirming that the diet quality of these medical professional trainees is below average. Our findings are consistent with an overall trend in the US of a decline in diet quality [15, 23, 25,26,27].

We found that students had significantly higher total REAP-S scores, and thus better self-reported diet quality, than residents, supporting our first research hypothesis. Additionally, those with lower BMIs had higher REAP-S scores than those with higher BMIs, confirming our second hypothesis. There was not an interaction between role (student vs. resident) and BMI on diet quality, as predicted by our third research hypothesis.

Diet quality can be influenced by multiple systematic, individual, and local variables, including cultural and food environments, sociodemographic factors, and insomnia [27, 28]. There are several factors which may explain differences in overall REAP-S scores between students and residents, and to lower-than-average overall REAP-S scores for both groups.

Poor sleep may contribute to poor diet quality in healthcare students and residents. Sleep regularity has been found to be one of the most important variables related to food intake in a study of adolescents who are overweight or obese, and shorter sleep duration was directly correlated to lower total REAP scores and higher calories and fat intake [29]. Medical students have documented higher magnitudes of sleep deprivation compared to the general population [30]. Additionally, one study found that a shortened sleep cycle was associated with poor diet quality in medical students [31]. Residents likely face an even greater sleep deficit than medical students, with shift work and night calls occurring much more frequently [30, 32, 33]. This may explain, in part, their lower REAP-S scores.

Our data collection occurred during the COVID-19 pandemic (2020–2022), which has been shown to have a detrimental influence on diet quality [15]. A recent study found that several factors contributed to lower diet quality during the pandemic, including decreased time for food preparation and lower interest in healthy eating as well as increased frequency in eating away from home, higher food insecurity, increased anxiety, depression or boredom, and stockpiling of junk food [34]. Generally, the experiences of medical students and residents during the pandemic were vastly different, perhaps leading to differences in effects on diet quality. Students transitioned to distance learning, providing them with greater opportunity to prepare food at home. At the same time residents’ work schedules remained the same or became more intense.

Stress may be another contributing factor. The role of stress in diet quality is well-established, and medical students routinely experience higher stress levels than the same-age non-medical peers [35, 36]. Stress has been found to have been exacerbated during the pandemic in students [28, 34, 37, 38]. Moreover, residents have experienced more occupational stress during the pandemic than at any other time in the history of the medical profession [35, 36, 39].

The only specific REAP-S item on which our students and residents differed significantly was skipping breakfast, a factor that, in and of itself, has been found to contribute to poorer diet quality [38]. Residents reported “Rarely/Never” skipping breakfast at a much lower proportion than students. This finding corresponds to a previous study that found that residents increased the frequency with which they skipped breakfast in their first year of residency [40]. Differences in breakfast consumption between students and residents may contribute to the overall difference between residents and students on the total REAP-S scores.

A particular strength of our study was the use of the REAP-S, which has been validated in medical professional trainees and used extensively in other populations. Moreover, the REAP-S has recently been selected by the American Heart Association as one of three rapid diet assessment screening tools for cardiovascular disease risk reduction that are optimal for use in a clinical setting [9]. Previous studies with medical students that have reported on dietary and lifestyle practices [20] provided information on daily caloric intake and specific food intake but did not report on comprehensive dietary quality, [16, 21] whereas the REAP-S has been shown to correlate with cardiometabolic health of the surveyed population.

Our study has limitations inherent in any survey study examining self-reported data. The sample in this type of study is self-selecting, introducing possible bias. Data were collected from one midwestern institution, and the response rate was smaller than desired. Results may not be generalizable to other student and resident populations. Additionally, while students were surveyed at the height of the COVID-19 lockdown (June, 2020), residents were surveyed a year later, following the release of the COVID-19 vaccine. This may have contributed to group differences in weight and dietary behaviors. Another limitation is that we did not include measures of sleep, stress, and other possible pandemic-related factors such as change in work schedules, loss of loved ones, loneliness, food insecurity, that may be related to diet quality [41].

Implications for research and practice

There are few precedent comprehensive studies in the US on medical trainee diet quality for comparison, so the role of sleep and stress, or other possible drivers of poor diet quality, cannot be teased out in this cohort. Future studies should examine the impact that poor sleep quality and increased stress have on diet quality in a cohort of medical trainees. Newer research in this area should use the updated REAP-S v.2 [42].

The overwhelmingly positive response to our question on the willingness to make changes in eating habits to be healthier is an encouraging finding. Reducing meals away from home and increasing nutrition knowledge and beliefs are associated with improved diet quality [43]. Recent evidence suggests that even brief nutritional training can increase medical students’ nutrition awareness [16]. Several such programs, such as Nutrition in Medicine, Healthy Kitchen, and Culinary Medicine, have been demonstrated to be helpful [44,45,46,47]. Future research should more closely examine how these efforts are related to improved diet quality in trainees. Because we collected our data during the COVID-19 pandemic, additional research is also needed to see if our results are replicated under more normal conditions.

Nutritional training has also been found to improve physician self-efficacy in dietary counseling for patients [48]. As trainees move into practice, an emphasis on nutrition education may translate into better nutrition counseling for their patients. Future studies could examine whether familiarizing medical trainees with additional screening tools may result in better nutritional care for patients. The REAP-S, accompanied by the WAVE, a tool that facilitates dialog between physicians and patients on Weight, Activity, Variety (of foods), and Excess (consumption), contain specific details on how diet quality can be improved and are designed to be used in clinical settings [49].

Less-than-optimal diet quality in our medical trainees may have significant long-term consequences. Poor REAP-S scores and increasing weight have been found to be correlated with cardiometabolic abnormalities, suggesting the potential for long-term adverse health outcomes in our study cohort [23]. However, the willingness to improve diet quality in our trainees affirms the potential for improvement. Longitudinal assessments and targeted nutritional education interventions may help maintain and improve the health of our future healthcare workforce.

Our study provides a quantitative assessment of the diet quality of medical students and primary care residents at an academic medical center in the midwestern United States. Both primary care residents and medical students had lower-than-average diet quality, with residents having lower quality when compared to medical students. We advocate for nutritional education, self-practice skills, wellness efforts, and sleep hygiene across the medical education continuum to improve diet quality for our future workforce. Ultimately, healthy providers will be influential in improving the diet quality of their patients and the health of the nation to mitigate the ever-increasing burdens of chronic care.

Data availability

Research data has been deposited to the Harvard Dataverse and can be accessed via https://doi.org/10.7910/DVN/AF1YVM.

References

  1. Liu J, Micha R, Li Y, Mozaffarian D. Trends in food sources and diet quality among US children and adults, 2003–2018. JAMA Netw Open. 2021;4(4):e215262.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  2. Gardea-Resendez M, Winham SJ, Romo-Nava F, et al. Quantification of diet quality utilizing the rapid eating assessment for participants-shortened version in bipolar disorder: implications for prospective depression and cardiometabolic studies. J Affect Disord. 2022;310(Journal Article):150–5.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  3. Lowe E. The year of nutrition. Lancet. 2019;393(Journal Article):200.

    Google Scholar 

  4. Cresci G, Beidelschies M, Tebo J, Hull A. Educating future physicians in nutritional science and practice: the time is now. J Am Coll Nutr. 2019;(Journal Article).

  5. Wirt A, Collins CE. Diet quality–what is it and does it matter? Public Health Nutr. 2009;12(12):2473–92.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Alkerwi A. Diet quality concept. Nutrition. 2014;30(6):613–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Miller V, Webb P, Micha R, Mozaffarian D, Database GD. Defining diet quality: a synthesis of dietary quality metrics and their validity for the double burden of malnutrition. Lancet Planet Health. 2020;4(8):e352–70.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  8. Dalwood P, Marshall S, Burrows TL, McIntosh A, Collins CE. Diet quality indices and their associations with health-related outcomes in children and adolescents: an updated systematic review. Nutr J. 2020;19(1):1–43.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Vadiveloo M, Lichtenstein AH, Anderson C, et al. Rapid diet assessment screening tools for cardiovascular disease risk reduction across healthcare settings: a scientific statement from the American Heart Association. Circ Cardiovasc Qual Outcomes. 2020;13(9):e000094.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Food and Nutrition Services: Healthy Eating Index. 2022;2022(9.29.). Accessed March 1, 6AD. https://www.fns.usda.gov/healthy-eating-index-hei.

  11. Gans KM, Risica PM, Wylie-Rosett J, et al. Development and evaluation of the nutrition component of the Rapid Eating and Activity Assessment for patients (REAP): a new tool for primary care providers. J Nutr Educ Behav. 2006;38(5):286–92.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Segal-Isaacson CJ, Wylie-Rosett J, Gans KM. Validation of a short dietary assessment questionnaire: the Rapid Eating and Activity Assessment for participants short version (REAP-S). Diabetes Educ. 2004;30(5):774–81.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Fernandes DP, de Ribeiro S, Duarte AQ, Franceschini MSL. S do CC. Systematic review of healthy eating indexes in adults and elderly: applicability and validity. 2015;(Journal Article).

  14. Johnston CS, Bliss C, Knurick JR, Scholtz C. Rapid Eating Assessment for participants [shortened version] scores are associated with healthy eating Index-2010 scores and other indices of diet quality in healthy adult omnivores and vegetarians. Nutr J. 2018;17(1):1–7.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. USDA Economic Research Service: U.S. Department of Agriculture. Diet Quality & Nutrition. 2022;2022(9.29.). Accessed April 1, 2AD. https://www.ers.usda.gov/topics/food-choices-health/diet-quality-nutrition/.

  16. Coleman MT, Brantley PR, Wiseman PM, English MR, Byerley LO. Brief, effective experience to increase first-year medical students’ nutrition awareness. Med Educ Online. 2021;26(1):1896160.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  17. Wood NI, Gleit RD, Levine DL. Culinary nutrition course equips future physicians to educate patients on a healthy diet: an interventional pilot study. BMC Med Educ. 2021;21(1):280. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12909-021-02702-y.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  18. Rothman JM, Bilici N, Mergler B et al. A culinary medicine elective for clinically experienced medical students: a pilot study.

  19. Ring M, Cheung E, Mahadevan R, Folkens S, Edens N. Cooking up health: a novel culinary medicine and service learning elective for health professional students. J Altern Complement Med. 2019;25(1):61–72.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Bergeron N, Al-Saiegh S, Ip EJ. An analysis of California pharmacy and medical students’ dietary and lifestyle practices. Am J Pharm Educ. 2017;81(8).

  21. Whipps J, Mort SC, Beverly EA, Guseman EH. Influence of osteopathic medical students’ personal health on attitudes toward counseling obese pediatric patients. J Osteopath Med. 2019;119(8):488–98.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Spencer EH, Frank E, Elon LK, Hertzberg VS, Serdula MK, Galuska DA. Predictors of nutrition counseling behaviors and attitudes in US medical students. Am J Clin Nutr. 2006;84(3):655–62.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Mayra S, Ugarte N, Johnston CS. Health biomarkers in adults are more closely linked to diet quality attributes than to plant-based diet categorization. Nutrients. 2019;11(6):1427.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  24. UNMC Fact Book. https://www.unmc.edu/academicaffairs/institutional/institutional-research/fact-book.html.

  25. Yousef M, Khandalavala B. The Diet Quality of Medical students in the United States during the early COVID-19 pandemic. Int J Med Stud. 2022;10(2):158–64.

    Google Scholar 

  26. Nagao-Sato S, Reicks M. Food away from home frequency, Diet Quality, and Health: cross-sectional analysis of NHANES Data 2011–2018. Nutrients. 2022;14(16):3386.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  27. Long T, Zhang K, Chen Y, Wu C. Trends in Diet Quality among older US adults from 2001 to 2018. JAMA Netw Open. 2022;5(3):e221880.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  28. Ramón-Arbués E, Granada-López JM, Martínez-Abadía B, Echániz-Serrano E, Antón-Solanas I, Jerue BA. Factors related to Diet Quality: a cross-sectional study of 1055 University students. Nutrients. 2021;13(10):3512.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  29. Ievers-Landis CE, Kneifel A, Giesel J, et al. Dietary intake and eating-related cognitions related to sleep among adolescents who are overweight or obese. J Pediatr Psychol. 2016;41(6):670–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Grady F, Roberts LW. Sleep deprived and overwhelmed: sleep behaviors of medical students in the USA. Acad Psychiatry. 2017;41(5):661–3.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Haghighatdoost F, Karimi G, Esmaillzadeh A, Azadbakht L. Sleep deprivation is associated with lower diet quality indices and higher rate of general and central obesity among young female students in Iran. Nutrition. 2012;28(11–12):1146–50.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Basner M, Dinges DF, Shea JA et al. Sleep and alertness in medical interns and residents: an observational study on the role of extended shifts. Sleep. 2017;40(4).

  33. Perotta B, Arantes-Costa FM, Enns SC, et al. Sleepiness, sleep deprivation, quality of life, mental symptoms and perception of academic environment in medical students. BMC Med Educ. 2021;21(1):1–13.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. Batis C, Irizarry L, Castellanos-Gutiérrez A et al. Factors associated with dietary quality during initial and later stages of the COVID-19 pandemic in Mexico. Front Nutr. 2021;8(Journal Article).

  35. Hill MR, Goicochea S, Merlo LJ. In their own words: stressors facing medical students in the millennial generation. Med Educ Online. 2018;23(1):1530558.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  36. Ebrahimi S, Kargar Z. Occupational stress among medical residents in educational hospitals. Ann Occup Environ Med. 2018;30(1):1–6.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  37. McCullough ML, Chantaprasopsuk S, Islami F, et al. Association of Socioeconomic and Geographic factors with Diet Quality in US adults. JAMA Netw Open. 2022;5(6):e2216406.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  38. Zeballos E, Todd JE. The effects of skipping a meal on daily energy intake and diet quality. Public Health Nutr. 2020;23(18):3346–55.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  39. Al-Humadi S, Bronson B, Muhlrad S, Paulus M, Hong H, Cáceda R. Depression, suicidal thoughts, and burnout among physicians during the COVID-19 pandemic: a survey-based cross-sectional study. Acad Psychiatry. 2021;45(5):557–65.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  40. Wee CE, Petrosky J, Mientkiewicz L, Liu X, Patel KK, Rothberg MB. Changes in Health and Well-being during residents’ training. South Med J. 2020;113(2):70–3.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  41. Rawat D, Dixit V, Gulati S, Gulati S, Gulati A. Impact of COVID-19 outbreak on lifestyle behaviour: a review of studies published in India. Diabetes Metab Syndr Clin Res Rev. 2021;15(1):331–6. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dsx.2020.12.038.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  42. Shankar V, Thompson KH, Wylie-Rosett J, Segal-Isaacson CJ. Validation and reliability for the updated REAP-S dietary screener, (Rapid Eating Assessment of Participants, short version, v.2). BMC Nutr. 2023;9(1):88. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40795-023-00747-4.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  43. Beydoun MA, Powell LM, Wang Y. Reduced away-from-home food expenditure and better nutrition knowledge and belief can improve quality of dietary intake among US adults. Public Health Nutr. 2009;12(3):369–81.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  44. Naja F, Hamadeh R. Nutrition amid the COVID-19 pandemic: a multi-level framework for action. Eur J Clin Nutr. 2020;74(8):1117–21.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  45. Evidence-based clinical nutrition education for medical students, residents, fellows, and other physicians. 2021;2021(2/22/). Accessed October 1, 3AD. https://www.nutritioninmedicine.org/.

  46. Healthy, Kitchen. Healthy Lives. 2021(2/22/). https://www.healthykitchens.org/.

  47. Health meets food. the culinary medicine curriculum. 2021(2/22/). https://culinarymedicine.org/.

  48. Harkin N, Johnston E, Mathews T, et al. Physicians’ dietary knowledge, attitudes, and counseling practices: the experience of a single health care center at changing the landscape for dietary education. Am J Lifestyle Med. 2019;13(3):292–300.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  49. Gans KM, Ross E, Barner CW, Wylie-Rosett J, McMurray J, Eaton C. REAP and WAVE: new tools to rapidly assess/discuss nutrition with patients. J Nutr. 2003;133(2):S556–62.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

Mary Beth Steele and Frauke Wilcox for administrative assistance.

Funding

There was no funding used for this study.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. University of Nebraska Medical Center, Omaha, NE, USA

    Birgit Khandalavala, Stephanie Emig, Mira Yousef & Jenenne Geske

  2. Nebraska Medicine, Omaha, NE, USA

    Birgit Khandalavala & Stephanie Emig

Authors
  1. Birgit Khandalavala
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Stephanie Emig
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Mira Yousef
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Jenenne Geske
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

BK, SE, MY and JG wrote the manuscript text and JG prepared the tables and figures. All authors reviewed the manuscript.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Birgit Khandalavala.

Ethics declarations

Ethics approval and consent to participate

This study was approved by the Institutional Review Board of the University of Nebraska Medical Center (IRB #492-20-EX and IRB #0217-21-EX), and the Dean of the College of Medicine. All methods were performed in accordance with the relevant guidelines and regulations. Informed consent was given at the time of the survey.

Consent for publication

Not applicable.

Competing interests

The authors declare no competing interests.

Additional information

Publisher’s Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Khandalavala, B., Emig, S., Yousef, M. et al. Diet quality in medical trainees: a cross-sectional assessment comparing medical students and primary care residents using the Rapid Eating Assessment for Participants—shortened version. BMC Nutr 10, 106 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1186/s40795-024-00899-x

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s40795-024-00899-x

Keywords

BMC Nutrition

ISSN: 2055-0928

Contact us